Conquer Club

Are kids their parents responsibility? Or the Communities responsibility?

I believe the parents, but if the parents are unfit to actually raise them then they should be taken by the community ie some other parents.

maasman wrote:I believe the parents, but if the parents are unfit to actually raise them then they should be taken by the community ie some other parents.

Isn't that a pretty tiny minority though? And, we have had orphanages and charities and adoption systems and federal programs (recently) for a few centuries now, right?

Write-in vote:

Kids don't belong to anyone cause slavery was abolished a while ago.

Agreed. Children are separate human entities which possess all the human rights owed to them after birth. They are the owner of themselves.

Yeah chiming in with the you don't "own" your children. You're legally responsible for them but that's it. From the blurb you posted I agree with the lady. Children are members of society and society as a whole needs to worry about them and think about how we can ensure children reach their full potential.

I don't neceseraly agree with her second argument that as a result we need heavy investment in education. Regardless I think it's pretty obvious society as a whole has a stake in the education of future adults.

So members of... That seems like a different definition for belonging than property.

What sort of father would enslave his kids?

Symmetry wrote:What sort of father would enslave his kids?

I would. They have to earn their keep once they are old enough. I'm a fairly benevolent slave owner though - they get education, room and board, food, clothing, I even let them earn some money to spend how they see fit. Once they are old enough to support themselves I grant them their freedom.

Until such time that they can move out and support themselves, their asses are MINE though. I expect them to work for me.

Ooh! A follow up. I actually like her argument as to why the community owns children. Yes it's brought to you by Shawn Hannity, but if anyone else has a segment on this issue please share!

Ace Rimmer wrote:

Symmetry wrote:What sort of father would enslave his kids?

I'm a fairly benevolent slave owner though.

Is that like a gentle rapist, or a polite murderer?

This is a tactic to distract people from real issues,and to fulfill there preconceived notions of what "professors" all think.

Phatscotty wrote:

maasman wrote:I believe the parents, but if the parents are unfit to actually raise them then they should be taken by the community ie some other parents.

Isn't that a pretty tiny minority though? And, we have had orphanages and charities and adoption systems and federal programs (recently) for a few centuries now, right?

What I mean is, we are all aware of the issue you raised, I think it's probably the #1 thing everyone can agree on, I think it's always been the #1 thing that everyone can agree on (feeding hungry children-foster homes).

I think the issue is being addressed. and if you know a child who is hungry, then give them some damn food. We should stop trying to funnel everything through a federal system dominated by ivy league educated power hungry lawyers who waste 30% of everything they touch and cost another 30% just to "administrate" and pay themselves 6 figures to do it

Anyone who is hungry, there are churches every other block. I guarantee you they will not turn you away or refuse to give you something to eat. There are food shelves all over the place, and I know they haven't been stocked as we'd like them to be, but the person I know who "depends" on the food shelf, and has even had a newspaper article done on her to promote sympathy for single mothers struggling.....she still makes her trip to the local casino every Friday night

--Andy

Symmetry wrote:

Ace Rimmer wrote:

Symmetry wrote:What sort of father would enslave his kids?

I'm a fairly benevolent slave owner though.

Is that like a gentle rapist, or a polite murderer?

If you use lube and roofies, it's very possible to be a gentle rapist.

If you say "excuse me sir, I am terribly sorry, but I must end your life now" then yes, you are a polite murderer.

I don't know. Sure seems like my kids own me most of the time...

Battman.

Neoteny wrote:Agreed. Children are separate human entities which possess all the human rights owed to them after achieving some form of preconceived congnition... generally 6 months to 1 year old. They are the owner of themselves.

Fixed for Metsfan.

ManBungalow wrote:Battman.

Don't tempt me....

We all know what Churchill said:

If you have to kill a man...

DoomYoshi wrote:We all know what Churchill said:

"If you have to kill a man...

...ask how much he's willing to f*ck you?"

Okay, so according to MHP it's common sense that kids are public property, and the private notion that kids belong to their parents is outdated.


Now, let's go cray cray with some really weird and wacky stuff!

Haggis_McMutton wrote:Write-in vote:

Kids don't belong to anyone cause slavery was abolished a while ago.

Agreed,what an appalling notion,parents have stewardship over their offspring unless they are deemed unfit for the responsibility.